Análise das propriedades psicométricas do questionário de conhecimento processual no voleibol para jovens atletas brasileiros

• Ano de defesa: 2021
• Autor(a) principal: Maranhão, José Fellipe Soares
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal da Paraíba; Brasil; Medicina; Programa Associado de Pós Graduação em Educação Física (UPE/UFPB); UFPB
• Palavras-chave em Português: Psicometria; Validade; Voleibol; Tomada de decisão; Psicologia do esporte; Psychometry; Validity; Volleyball; Decision making; Sport psychology; CNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::EDUCACAO FISICA
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufpb.br/jspui/handle/123456789/20480

The present study aimed to analyze the psychometric properties of Procedural Knowledge Questionnaire in Volleyball (PKQV) for young Brazilian athletes. To assess the content validity of the instrument, five experts (including doctors and volleyball team coaches) were invited to assess the clarity of language (CL), practical relevance (PP), and theoretical relevance (TR) of the items of the instrument, on a 5- point Likert scale (being: 1- "very little", 2- as "little", 3- as "average", 4- as "much" and finally 5- as "very much") , where the Content Validity Coefficient (CVC) was verified a posteriori for each criterion that the experts evaluated. After content validity results, 501 volleyball athletes of both sexes, aged 11 to 15 years, participating in the Paraná Volleyball Cup in 2019, answered the instrument to analyze the construct validity of the through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and later through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). To verify the convergent validity, the Average Extracted Variance (AEV) was used. To check the instrument's consistency, the composite reliability (CR) and the test-retest reliability were used through the intraclass correlation index. The data obtained by the content validity were tabulated and analyzed with a specific formula in Microsoft Excel version 2013. The construct validity obtained through the EFA was analyzed by the IBM SPSS software version 24.0, using the factorization technique by the main axis with oblique rotation Promax, corrected by Kaiser's normalization, excluding items with a factor load less than 0.3, or is arranged in more than one factor. The CFA was analyzed using the Amos software, where indicators were used: Chi-Square (x2 and pvalue), Normalized Chi- Square (x2 / df), Goodness of Fit (GFI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA ), Normalized Adjustment Index (NFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) and Comparative Adjustment Index (CFI) to analyze the generated model. Finally, CC and convergent validity were tabulated and analyzed in an excel spreadsheet. The results showed that for content validity, the instrument presented positive indexes in the CVC for CL (0.92), PP (0.91), and TR (0.91), with only item 23 being excluded from the instrument because it presents values of CVC less than 0.8. In the construct validity, after EFA, only 13 of the 23 remaining items of the instrument had a factor load above 0.3, with the 13 items arranged in 3 factors. The results obtained by the CFA showed that the instrument showed good adjustment indexes (x2 = 95.91; p = 0.004; x2 / gl = 1.55; CFI = 0.90; GFI = 0.97; NFI = 0.78; TLI = 0 , 88 and RMSEA = 0.035), however, only three items had a factor load above 0.5. The internal consistency through the CR showed an acceptable value for the construct as a whole (0.71); however, the individual values of each factor of the instrument showed values below 0.5. The convergent validity through VEM presented weak indices, being in all factors, as in the instrument in its entirety, below 0.2. The QCPV instrument, the final Brazilian version, presented 13 items arranged in 3 factors. Changing the number of items or factors is a possibility when performing the instrument validation process; however, based on the results presented during the analysis of the questionnaire's psychometric properties, it is concluded that the instrument did not obtain satisfactory indexes in the parameters used, being necessary new studies with the construct so that coaches and researchers of sport psychology can use it.